Re: [css-syntax] Removed <unicode-range-token>, please review

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:27 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
> I'd prefer to leave which values are valid syntax and which aren't
> the way they are; I don't see the point in introducing compatibility
> risk without a good reason.  Unless, that is, implementation
> behavior doesn't actually match the current spec.

While I don't *generally* agree that this is necessary, looking over
the complications of handling the syntax properly when I take scinot
into account, I'm going to switch to an approach that makes "match the
current syntax" easy to do.

(I'm just going to claim all the token combinations that show up,
regardless of what's in them, then concatenate and re-parse their
representations.  This makes it much easier to the correct number of
characters in each form. This makes <urange> a bit wider in
syntax-space than I'd like, but it's not a big deal, and, like <anb>,
you just have to be careful when using <urange> in new syntaxes in the
future.)

~TJ

Received on Monday, 17 November 2014 19:32:54 UTC